"Mike Marlow" <mmarlowREMOVE (AT) windstream (DOT) net> wrote in
news:d5d43$4acc8d06$471fb983$26591 (AT) ALLTEL (DOT) NET:

Because NASCAR's past foolish decisions are catching up with
them, and now they're stuck.

Back in the day, you went thru pre-race inspection to find out
if your car was legal. If you failed, the inspectors sent you
back to the garage to fix whatever failed, and you went thru
inspection again.

But in recent times NASCAR, geniuses that they are, have
decided that people that fail pre-race inspection are evil
cheaters, determined to get around the system, and so instead
of telling people to fix whatever's wrong, they've assessed
points and dollar fines. Nevermind that the bolt you picked
up out of the parts bin was legal last year and you grabbed
the wrong bin by accident this year, it's 50 points and $50k.

So now you've got the Hendrick cars, so close to the limit of
tolerance that NASCAR's not sure the at-track crew can measure
them accurately. And the track inspections are done in the
open (unlike the R&D center inspections, which are done in
private, hidden away from everyone), so if the inspector
measures .01 different, now the car fails inspection.

So then NASCAR would be in a bind. They don't want to DQ and
penalize a Hendrick car, especially not fan-favorite Martin.
But they can't ignore it, not with everyone in the garage
seeing the inspection happen. And they can't just say go
back and fix it, without everyone and his uncle screaming
"unfair!". It's a loose/loose/loose situation.

So, NASCAR's simple solution - tell Hendrick not to bring a
car that's so close that it might fail. Don't put NASCAR in
an embarassing position.

It's a hell of a way to run a susposedly serious sport.

John

Nancy2 <nancy-dooley (AT) uiowa (DOT) edu> wrote in
news:f6a396ac-b365-4a29-bdb3-cff6a02f6a0f (AT) k26g2000vbp (DOT) googlegroups.com:

NASCAR did eventually change the rules to make the T-Rex chassis
an illegal configuration.

John

"John McCoy" wrote in message

I think because the media, and it's eagerness to report
things, whether actually true or suspected, is the main
reason this has evolved into a "blown way out of proportion"
catagory.

The cars were legal.
That is REALLY all that matters.
The cars were taken to the R&D facitlity, because that is what
they
do, not mecessarily because anyone was thought to be cheating.
Those cars have been there a half dozen times this year.
Everything else is just jaw flapping.

Anna

"Anna Khonda" <Anna_Khonda (AT) nospaming (DOT) com> wrote

Whether they were legal or not is purely speculation/assumption. All we know
for certain is that they were Nascar approved.

On Oct 7, 12:35 pm, "armpit" <armarmpit... (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote:
Only if you are a conspiracy nut.

"Rick" <pearl (AT) cray (DOT) com> wrote

Do you believe everything you are told? Do you believe that Nascar is 100%
fair & honest? Really?

Is it just completely impossible in your world that Nascar would look the
other way when one of the sport's premiere teams is just a hair over the
line?

And since we're discussing Nascar's credibility, why does Nascar keep its
rulebook away from the public eye? What are they hiding?

On Oct 7, 1:53 pm, "armpit" <armarmpit... (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote:

were close (i.e. a sheet of paper). Nascar wanted to
measure them using a more accurate tool. They did and
they both passed.

Even if the cars were off by a sheet of paper, are you
seriously going to penalize any team for that? We are
not talking about 1/4, 1/8, 1/16, or 1/32 of an inch,
we are talking about a sheet of paper. I mean this
isn't a watch, it's a 3,000 pound hunk of aluminum,
steel, graphite, rubber, and leather.

Why are you so obsessed with labling the #48 team as
cheaters over something as thick as a sheet of paper?

How long have you been a nascar fan? Or are you?

armpit wrote:
The same reason the T-Rex car wasn't allowed back on the track?

Rick wrote:
So if that was "misreported", what else has been "misreported"?

On Oct 7, 11:18*am, John McCoy <igop... (AT) ix (DOT) netcom.com> wrote:
Yeah, but. After the fact. ;-)

N.